Elias Pettersson | #40 | C

[joe-max]

1 minute ago, NUCKER67 said:

Good character is important, but not a lot of Stanley Cup champion teams are filled with nice guys. Seems every championship team has at least one or two a-holes on the team. Canucks almost got there with Burr and Lapierre, but Marchand and Thornton proved to be the bigger a-holes. 

Canucks also had Kesler and Torres. Possibly one minor factor in losing the public and the referees? Pure speculation of course...

[Nucker 67]

1 minute ago, joe-max said:

Canucks also had Kesler and Torres. Possibly one minor factor in losing the public and the referees? Pure speculation of course...

oh yeah, those guys too, they had a lot of grit

 

As much as I dislike saying it, Matthew Tkachuk will win a Cup one day. He's built for the playoffs. I kind of feel bad for Juolevi in a way, because he's got pressure on him to play like a #5 pick (whenever he's ready for the NHL), and will always be compared to Tkachuk.

[gameburn]

15 minutes ago, joe-max said:

It is only evidence that JB looks for good character.

You think Tkachuk is just a touch too, what's the word, nasty?   

[Elias Pettersson]

31 minutes ago, gameburn said:

And we'd already have had the benefit of Tkachuk's play for 2 years.   Which we obviously have not had with Juolevi.  Hard to say whether Juolevi will ever catch up with Tkachuk -- at least from a Canucks viewpoint.   And can you imagine the points Tkachuk would be putting up with EP? 

 

I'm curious: do you think the Juolevi vs. Tkachuk pick is evidence of the principle that you should always go for the best player available, regardless of position? 

I think we chose a D on principle that year.  If we'd chosen in the top 3 I'm sure Benning would have gone with Matthews, or Laine or Dubois, all of whom have worked out.  I remember Benning saying something about how a D would be good if the team couldn't get a definitive franchise forward out of the mix (i.e., top 2 or 3).

 

I think you have to wait another 2-3 years before you can call that draft.  Defencemen typically take more time to develop than a left winger.  If Juolevi develops into a bonafide top 4 defenceman playing 19-20 minutes a night and plays in all key situations including power play and penalty kill and can get you 25-30 points then it's still a win for the Canucks IMO.  Looking at our defence right now leads me to believe that Benning really knew he had to upgrade it with multiple players, hence the drafting of Hughes and Woo last year.  

 

I think solid top 4 D are harder to find at this point than top left wingers, so that is probably what JB was thinking at the time.  Tkachuk is a bona fide talent for sure, and he would look great on Pettersson's left side with Boeser.  I mean that could be a top line in the entire NHL.  But selecting Juolevi might turn out to be the right choice depending on his development.

[joe-max]

2 minutes ago, gameburn said:

You think Tkachuk is just a touch too, what's the word, nasty?   

I can recall several instances where he was more, what's the word, douchebaggy. I can appreciate that he at least stands up for himself and fights and you're probably right that he will be valuable in the play-offs. Still, wouldn't want him on my team. Too dirty.

[canuckistani]

1 minute ago, Elias Pettersson said:

I think you have to wait another 2-3 years before you can call that draft.  Defencemen typically take more time to develop than a left winger.  If Juolevi develops into a bonafide top 4 defenceman playing 19-20 minutes a night and plays in all key situations including power play and penalty kill and can get you 25-30 points then it's still a win for the Canucks IMO.  Looking at our defence right now leads me to believe that Benning really knew he had to upgrade it with multiple players, hence the drafting of Hughes and Woo last year.  

 

I think solid top 4 D are harder to find at this point than top left wingers, so that is probably what JB was thinking at the time.  Tkachuk is a bona fide talent for sure, and he would look great on Pettersson's left side with Boeser.  I mean that could be a top line in the entire NHL.  But selecting Juolevi might turn out to be the right choice depending on his development.

 

I think the biggest reason people are saying Tkachuk over Ollie ( and i agree with them) is the position of the pick. In the top-six, if you pick a defenseman, that pick better be a 1D potential guy. Because as we see from so many very very good top 4 defensemen, you can draft them in the 2nd round and get them there. 
So if the expectation was 'we need a top-4 defenseman', then i'd say Benning screwed up, picking a top-4 defenseman so high in the draft. I'd say Benning picked him with the hope that Ollie would be a 1D one day. 

[gameburn]

14 hours ago, Hutton Wink said:

On pace for 90 points, now tied for team lead with Stecher at +11.  Still shooting 28%.

Imagine being +11 on a team that has a losing record?  And your point about Stecher is eye-opening.  Stetcher can appear kind of meh out there... maybe we aren't seeing his full game.   Maybe trying lines of 5 players like the old Soviet teams would be worth looking at again.   Put your best plus and minus groups together and give them some increased playing time.

Maybe make them the core of a pp.

[gameburn]

7 minutes ago, canuckistani said:

 

I think the biggest reason people are saying Tkachuk over Ollie ( and i agree with them) is the position of the pick. In the top-six, if you pick a defenseman, that pick better be a 1D potential guy. Because as we see from so many very very good top 4 defensemen, you can draft them in the 2nd round and get them there. 
So if the expectation was 'we need a top-4 defenseman', then i'd say Benning screwed up, picking a top-4 defenseman so high in the draft. I'd say Benning picked him with the hope that Ollie would be a 1D one day. 

I think you hit it on the head.   But, imagine how different things would be if we hadn't picked with so little luck.  Benning would not have had to worry about either Tkachuk or Juolevi if we had picked in our rightful position, which was in the top 3.   He has not been lucky.  This franchise has had some bad luck too: Malhotra, Dorsett, Talon v. Perreault, Laine/Matthews vs. Juolevi, the Bertuzzi situation, the Hamhuis injury in the playoff run, etc.  All teams have had ups and downs, but it feels like we have had a few extra downs.

Edited December 12, 2018 by gameburn

[D.B Cooper]

37 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said:

Good character is important, but not a lot of Stanley Cup champion teams are filled with nice guys. Seems every championship team has at least one or two a-holes on the team. Canucks almost got there with Burr and Lapierre, but Marchand and Thornton proved to be the bigger a-holes. 

I’ve never been a big fan of holding ‘class’ so high when drafting.  

 

I’d take high compete/doing anything it takes to win, over class any day. 

 

Sure you want a guy a guy who is good in the community, but does that win you cups?   Not really.  

We had two of the classiest of all time who were also total all stars, and we watched them get beat up and made chumps out of, while the big bullies in Boston came in and took the cup.  

Watching Daniel get speed bagged by the Rat is an all time low for this franchise and something that we should all be embarrassed about.  

I’d much rather do the punching and winning than the turn the other cheek crap.  

 

Tkachuk is going to be an animal in the playoffs.   Refs put away their whistles and the game gets tough. 

That kid is going to win a cup for his team one day. 

[gameburn]

1 hour ago, Elias Pettersson said:

I think you have to wait another 2-3 years before you can call that draft.  Defencemen typically take more time to develop than a left winger.  If Juolevi develops into a bonafide top 4 defenceman playing 19-20 minutes a night and plays in all key situations including power play and penalty kill and can get you 25-30 points then it's still a win for the Canucks IMO.  Looking at our defence right now leads me to believe that Benning really knew he had to upgrade it with multiple players, hence the drafting of Hughes and Woo last year.  

 

I think solid top 4 D are harder to find at this point than top left wingers, so that is probably what JB was thinking at the time.  Tkachuk is a bona fide talent for sure, and he would look great on Pettersson's left side with Boeser.  I mean that could be a top line in the entire NHL.  But selecting Juolevi might turn out to be the right choice depending on his development.

Yes, I think you are right: Benning was really conscious of problems to come on D.  

Hughes, Woo and Juolevi will change this team probably for a decade and a half.  At the moment we have an incomplete mix on D: Hutton is best pmd, Edler best at all round defensive play (although he is too slow now to defend against some of the rushing situations), Tanev is unremarkable but reliable defensively, Gudbranson is good physically and in pk... in other words, no real powerful offensive D, and not enough players like Stecher who are good all over the ice (offensive and defensive).  I think Hughes and Woo will do what Stecher does but much better, and Juolevi will perhaps reduce Hutton's importance, perhaps make him trade material.  

 

So far, Tryamkin and Woo are his real finds, while Hughes is remarkable at pick 8.   Woo could  turn out to be better than either Tanev or Juolevi.   Hughes is possibly top-1/2 D who can change hockey in a good way.  If Tryamkin comes back and is Chara-lite we will go from being a little thin and weak on D to it being a strong point for the team.  

[SabreFan1]

Anyone post this from NHL Tonight yet?

 

 

[Tre Mac]

Need a good mix of prospects, they can't all be 160lbs danglers or 200lbs.+  power forwards.  That being said I'll take JV and EP over any combination of Nylander, Glass, Vilardi, Ehlers, etc.  Let's face it, EP40 is making Benning look like a genius right now which is fair giving the heat he got(and still gets) for taking Virtanen.

[Dazzle]

1 hour ago, Tre Mac said:

Need a good mix of prospects, they can't all be 160lbs danglers or 200lbs.+  power forwards.  That being said I'll take JV and EP over any combination of Nylander, Glass, Vilardi, Ehlers, etc.  Let's face it, EP40 is making Benning look like a genius right now which is fair giving the heat he got(and still gets) for taking Virtanen.

Are the people still whining about Virtanen?

 

He's showing why he was drafted so high. He's doing all the right things now. So far, the patience looks like it's been worth it. He can be even better than he is now. Let that sink in for a moment...

[Sandro17]

Also, remember that 

On 12/12/2018 at 2:36 PM, SabreFan1 said:

Anyone post this from NHL Tonight yet?

 

 

ROFLMAO none of these guys are close to Pettersson. I honestly can't believe how amazing Pettersson is right now. Having him is almost too good to be true. You think he'll be greater than Bure?

[-AJ-]

For the first time in his career, Pettersson now has more assists than goals.

[SabreFan1]

50 minutes ago, Sandro17 said:

You think he'll be greater than Bure?

Too early to tell.  EP40 hasn't even played half of a season in the NHL.  The Russian Rocket is a hall of famer, so that's a lot for EP40 to live up to.

[Bandwagon38]

On 12/12/2018 at 10:51 AM, gameburn said:

And we'd already have had the benefit of Tkachuk's play for 2 years.   Which we obviously have not had with Juolevi.  Hard to say whether Juolevi will ever catch up with Tkachuk -- at least from a Canucks viewpoint.   And can you imagine the points Tkachuk would be putting up with EP? 

 

I'm curious: do you think the Juolevi vs. Tkachuk pick is evidence of the principle that you should always go for the best player available, regardless of position? 

I think we chose a D on principle that year.  If we'd chosen in the top 3 I'm sure Benning would have gone with Matthews, or Laine or Dubois, all of whom have worked out.  I remember Benning saying something about how a D would be good if the team couldn't get a definitive franchise forward out of the mix (i.e., top 2 or 3).

 

Would you trade EP40 for Tkachuk?  Either would I so the bottom line is Juolevi led us to EP40.  I hate MT but his production probably would have cost us EP.  ideally Juolevi figures things out and with our new nucleus of talent we win our cup MT free.  Having a few guys delay a couple years will make us stronger as several start to peak together!  

[gameburn]

4 hours ago, Bandwagon38 said:

Would you trade EP40 for Tkachuk?  Either would I so the bottom line is Juolevi led us to EP40.  I hate MT but his production probably would have cost us EP.  ideally Juolevi figures things out and with our new nucleus of talent we win our cup MT free.  Having a few guys delay a couple years will make us stronger as several start to peak together!  

Yes, amazing how things work out.  Juolevi looks pretty good this year, and even if he is only slightly better than an improved Hutton, it would be great.   Clearly, we have needed D for a long while.  At least Benning has drafted D.  I don't remember Gillis doing well on that count. 

I have such mixed feelings about Tkachuk: clearly he produces, but the kind of attention he gets, yikes. 

[Kootenay Gold]

4 hours ago, gameburn said:

At least Benning has drafted D.  I don't remember Gillis doing well on that count. 

I had a quick glance back in the hockey db for the last 15 years and the Canucks have drafted very few notable defense men over that time span. Edler,2004; Bourdon, 2005; Connaughton, 2009; Hutton, 2012; and then we have JB's picks (granted some are still projections) Tryamkin, 2014; Brisbois, 2015; Juolevi, 2016; Rathbone and Brassard, 2017; Hughes and Woo, 2018. IMO JB has had a lot more focus on drafting defense men than previous GM's and a number of the ones that are still prospects, are having stellar seasons

[Alflives]

5 minutes ago, Kootenay Gold said:

I had a quick glance back in the hockey db for the last 15 years and the Canucks have drafted very few notable defense men over that time span. Edler,2004; Bourdon, 2005; Connaughton, 2009; Hutton, 2012; and then we have JB's picks (granted some are still projections) Tryamkin, 2014; Brisbois, 2015; Juolevi, 2016; Rathbone and Brassard, 2017; Hughes and Woo, 2018. IMO JB has had a lot more focus on drafting defense men than previous GM's and a number of the ones that are still prospects, are having stellar seasons

I think JB was in Boston when they signed Chara as a UFA.  I see all the young D he's drafted, and our future looks really good.  I'm wondering too if JB will go after a top end D man in Free Agency?  EK?  Similar move to signing Chara.